DAVID MARSHALL SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that certain probation conditions and fees must be stricken because they were not orally pronounced at sentencing.
The defendant was convicted of possession of marijuana, battery on a law enforcement officer, and resisting arrest without violence. The written order…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Discretionary Fines cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Judge.
David Marshall Smith appeals his convictions for possession of marijuana, battery on a law enforcement officer, and resisting arrest without violence. Smith raises six issues attacking his convictions, none of which have merit and we affirm the convictions without discussion. However, we agree with Smith’s contention that the trial court erred in imposing certain fees and probation conditions, which we strike.
Smith’s written order of probation includes two special conditions that must be stricken because they were not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing. See Justice v. State, 674 So. 2d 123, 126 (Fla.1996). Therefore, we strike condition eighteen except for those portions of the condition that prohibit Smith from consuming and possessing illegal drugs. See Callaway v. State, 658 So. 2d 593, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We also strike those portions of condition twenty that require Smith to pay for drug evaluation and treatment programs. See Curry v. State, 682 So. 2d 1091, 1092 (Fla.1996).
The trial court also erred in imposing a $150 FDLE fee without a request for the fee and without documentation justifying the amount. This fee must be stricken. See Madison v. State, 664 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Finally, the $44.77 discretionary fine and the $2.23 surcharge, not orally pronounced at sentencing, must also be stricken.
Conviction affirmed; certain fees and probation conditions stricken.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Caro v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 734 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…ecord to find her guilty of misconduct as defined in section 443.036(26). See Washington, 567 So. 2d at 422-23; see also School Board of Miami-Dade County v. Sutton, 710 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); and Fontaine v. Hillsborough County School Bd., 709 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Accordingly, the cause is REVERSED and REMANDED for entry of an award of benefits. BOOTH and BENTON, JJ„ CONCUR.…
-
Book v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co., 744 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…CA 1998), where the court held that a teacher’s failure to become eligible for a permanent teaching certificate did not amount to misconduct disqualifying him from unemployment compensation benefits; and Fontaine v. Hillsborough County School Board, 709 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), where a teacher’s failure to obtain her professional teaching certificate did not amount to misconduct disqualifying her from unemployment compensation benefits. [*1148] Here, it is clear that nothing in the record would indicate…
Authorities Cited
- Justice v. State, 674 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 1996)
- Deldesondro Callaway v. State, 658 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Curry v. State, 682 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 1996)
- Madison v. State, 664 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)